cmhe

Still silly, if they aren't confident to weed out Russian spies with Russian nationality, they are even less confident to weed out Russian spies with other nationalities. I would think that most undercover Russian spies don't have Russian nationality, because that is an obvious attribute, which is easy for a government secret agency to change.

There really is nothing better than background checks, and privilege separation for this kind of stuff.

Because part of the right-wing rise in Europe is caused by foreign influences of authoritarian states like Russia and China in order to destabilize democracies by divide and conquer strategies and to validate their oppressive governments. Higher living standards for normal people in their own or other countries are a threat to their power.

That might make it even more dangerous, because you get used to flash to usb sticks on "/dev/sda". And when you then use a device with a built-in sata drive, you might forget checking in a hurry.

Happened to me a once or twice. I am now only using bmap tools for this.

If you don't like the term "toot" it's fine, it shouldn't matter who coined it. Don't make your likes or dislikes dependent on who stuff or ideas come from.

I just wanted to explain some history of that term.

The knowledge of that history and context is what should influence your taste, not the specific individuals involved.

There is a bigger history on this. Involving the Mastodon developer Gargon and a famous YouTuber Hbomberguy:

https://mastodon.social/@Hbomberguy/146524

Gargon, at that time wasn't aware of the double meaning, as they where non-native English speaker.

It got changed back to "publish" relatively recent.

Personally I liked "toot" it was unique and funny. Many Mastodon-Users still prefer or use "toot".

An interesting concept would be if all hand on the 12 clocks would work, but the hands of the clock in the middle are stuck at 12 position, this way the hands in the middle would point to the clock showing the correct time.

This is the same between many different software development disciplines, fpga devs (or hardware devs for that matter) vs. driver devs, driver devs vs. backend dev, backend devs vs frontend devs, integrators vs everyone.

I am sort of in the same boat, because the game gradually unlocks improved recipes, I end up rebuilding and rebuilding the factory over and over.

Going vertically doesn't really help, you have to re-plan and rebuild the layout every time some new technology unlocks. And (re)building in first person perspective, is rather fiddly. I doesn't help when better tools are only available in later tiers, when I get fed up rebuilding the factory over and over before I even reach it.

I am fine with iterating over designs, but I get fed up when I cannot create a modular design, change it once and update all instances of that design in on go. Instead I have to manually rebuild everything.

ShapeZ 2 also has a similar problem, but they at least offer copy&paste early in game.

For Satisfactory I am waiting for mods to hopefully make factory building less cumbersome.

I would prefer if Satisfactory would focus more on designing new factory modules and optimizing, scaling up existing ones. So a first milestone would be, create 30 iron plates per minute, next 30 iron plates/min and 30 iron rods/minute, then both of those and copper wires 30/minute. The maybe 120 plates, 30 rods and 30 wires, and so on and so forth. That way the player doesn't remove their factories, just and new ones or optimize/scale up existing ones. Together with a way to create, modify and instantiate blueprints, organized in a library, the boring and fiddly/gridy stuff of (re)building the factory is lessened. Also avoiding copy and pasting factories, by creating sub-designs and instantiating them would be great.

I think you misunderstood, after 6 weeks Telsa doesn't need to pay anything, the state ensurance pays them 70% of their wage.

BTW, thank you for this discussion!

The crux of the matter for me is the question wherever "the selection process" alone is enough to create art or not, and depending on my mood I fall to one side or another on that question. Not specifically if it is under copyright or not, because that sort of follows from that.

Artists often use randomness in various parts of their creation process, what is really required is the human element. Is a picture of a cloud, that speaks to the photographer in some way art or just a picture of a random cloud?

I guess this has to be decided on a case by case basis, therefore I cannot completely exclude it.

Yes, and you have copyright on the photo - not the layout of the plants and trees in it, nor even the angle of the subject. Someone else can go with a camera and take their own photo without touching your copyright.

A work is original if it is independently created and is sufficiently creative. Creativity in photography can be found in a variety of ways and reflect the photographer’s artistic choices like the angle and position of subject(s) in the photograph, lighting, and timing. As a copyright owner, you have the right to make, sell or otherwise distribute copies, adapt the work, and publicly display your work.

https://www.copyright.gov/engage/photographers/

So if someone intentionally reproduces a picture, they violate copyright, IIUC.

In the case of minecraft, I think a case can be made, where the "picture" is the minecraft world, and the creativity is the selection process by the artist. The artist chooses their angle, position, lighting, etc, in this case they choose properties of the world, maybe by visiting thousands of them, using seed search machines, or other reverse engineering tools etc.

I all depends on if the artist can raise their work above just the random noise they get as an input in a creative way. I am not saying that all minecraft worlds (or save games for that matter) are subject to copyright, but since we are dealing with blurry lines of copyright, it is possible.

IANAL, but I think if I would look into case law, I would find examples for both options, in some cases the "selection process" was enough to demonstrate creativity, and in other cases it wasn't.

You are correct it isn't about the numbers, it is about the artistic and creative product that is copyrightable, which, in case of digital art, is represented as numbers, and distribution of those might be punished by law.

I am just saying that digital art can be more that just still or moving pictures and sound. It can be a world space the artist prepared for you where you can move around.

About the section on the law, I would read it just as stating what is covered under copyright, and not what isn't. I also just mentioned what original work is, not describing derived work.

Nature is often random and unpredictable, but the process of selecting a interesting POV and taking a picture of it is still copyrightable.

I wouldn't be so sure that if you discover a seed, that can be transformed using minecraft into a world with very interesting and specific properties, could not be under copyright protection.

In fact movies, pictures and books are specific numbers on a digital storage medium as well, that are transformed using a codec. That isn't something that can be easily replicated without that codec.

I am not a copyright lawyer, but I think there are precedences where just the selection process from a stream of (semi-) random number, pictures, sound or events alone can produce copyrightable products.